Talk:The Rolling Stones discography
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is surely a rather terrible discography, isn't it? Given the confusingness of the Stones' early catalogue, it'd be nice to try to lay it all out, including all singles in the US and UK, the UK EPs, and so forth...release dates (as opposed to just years) would be nice as well. I'll try to get on it. john k 20:04, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks in advance for your contribution, that would be great —you should have seen what a mess it was when it was on the main RS article, with the singles listed separately. As I stated on the main RS article's talk page, although I'm a fan, I've been mainly trying Wikify. - redcountess 02:13, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
-
- I'm wondering if you made a typo in the intro and meant U.S instead of U.K for the London Records releases? Will change it, but feel free to rv if wrong. - redcountess 02:18, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Sympathy for the Devil remix
Should the recent Sympathy for the Devil Remix EP be listed on this page? PlasticBeat 02:54, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure about stuff like that. My inclination is to only include the major English & American singles, EPs, and albums, and not include things like remixes and so forth. john k 07:45, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Sounds good, plus it's likely this would fall under a reissue category, and not under an original release. I think this was released by ABKCO in fall 2003 anyway, so it might not have been something the group officially had anything to do with, as ABKCO owns the rights to their early releases. PlasticBeat 16:17, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Album discography/chronological format
I have reverted this article to return the studio section to the chronological format that been used and regularly improved since the article's creation. I find, in particular, the association of "companion" US/UK releases to be important. Since several users had been developing the listing, and no users objected to the format, I presume it enjoyed consensus; therefore the recent format change, without notice or explanation in edit summaries and without talk page activity, was inappropriate. Monicasdude 06:46, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
Why not have a user's poll on the subject instead of constantly reverting it? Those tactics are going nowhere. PetSounds 00:37, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- Polls are evil. Consensus is achieved by discussion; not by polling. I suggest that you each explain the benefits of the layout that you favour and then invite comments at Wikipedia:Peer Review, Wikipedia:Requests for Comment or Wikipedia:Third opinion. —Theo (Talk) 00:52, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- Can I butt in here? I'm a consumer rather than editor here because I'm not a big Stones fan/authority and I came here to check out some information. What we've done in the Rush discography is colour-code the cells of the albums so you can tell at a glance compilations/live/studio albums using the wikipedi rock colour standard. It would be even more useful here because the (many) compilations are included in the main chronology & are confusing to me (the consumer). Megamanic 07:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Link to Still Life
The node "Still Life (album)" is about an Opeth album, not a Rolling Stones album. --Blenda Lovelace
[edit] Studio albums?
Why are there Live albums under the "Studio Albums" title?
[edit] Ruby Tuesday
In the 1967 single "Let's spend the night together/Ruby Tuesday" it says "Both Jagger/Richards",but in the 1991 single says "Jones/Richards (Credited to Jagger/Richards)". The truth is that the song is Jones/Richards.
[edit] Incorrect links
Most of the song title links in this topic are either redlinks, or lead to incorrect topics (that is, a topic not about the song.) What's the best way to fix this? Move the bad links to some uncreated new redlink? Or just un-link everything (except the few that are correct and working)?-- Mikeblas 18:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] ---Unofficial Albums?"---
Why include unauthorized albums on this page? I see no reason for it. At least make a seperate section for albums not officially endorsed by the stones instead of including them in with the other albums.
[edit] UK vs. US
I seperated the early releases between UK and US. Big Hits (High Tides and Green Grass) somehow got lost. I tried to change the Out of Our Heads picture to the UK version but I couldn't figure out how. Other than those two problems that I have no idea how to fix, I think the page is much easier to understand now.
[edit] Record companies
Neither this article nor the main RS one mention ABKCO. I understand all the Decca albums are said to have been published by American Decca under the London imprint. So where and when does ABKCO enter the picture? Did they only get a reissue deal sometime after 1969... or what?--S.Camus 12:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
After leaving Decca the Stones and former manager Allen Klein signed some contract, giving him all the rights on their (up-to-then) recorded material. (They probably didn't know exactly what they signed.) So from there on rereleases of the pre-"Sticky Fingers" material (Decca stuff) have been published on this label. Icyy2001 15:29, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
